< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D7100 firmware update C 1.01 released

Pin It

Nikon-D7100-firmware-update

Nikon announced C 1.01 firmware update for the D7100 DSLR camera. Here is the list of the modifications enabled with this upgrade:

  • When images captured using a flash in Manual or Repeating flash flash mode were played back with the “Overview” display enabled, flash output level was displayed in the flash compensation portion of the display.  This issue has been resolved.
  • When the AE/AF lock button was pressed with Special Effects mode enabled, Selective Color selected, and the view magnified with selective color options displayed in live view, the image did not change while live view was active.  This issue has been resolved.
    An issue that caused the Viewfinder Virtual Horizon to freeze when certain operations were performed has been resolved.
  • When images captured with white balance bracketing enabled were played back, a white balance fine-tuning value of 9 (steps) was displayed even for images captured with a fine-tuning value of 10 (steps) applied.  This issue has been resolved.
  • An issue that prevented cursor movement when certain operations were performed in calendar playback mode has been resolved.
  • The size of some text displayed in calendar playback mode has been modified.
  • Display of focal lengths in 35mm [135] format recorded in image Exif data has been corrected.
  • With movie recording at 1920 × 1080/24p in M exposure mode, subject brightness did not change, even when shutter speed was adjusted.  This issue has been resolved.

Download links: Nikon USA | Nikon UK

This entry was posted in Nikon D7100 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • obvious rant is obvious

    Especially #2 keeps bugging me on a daily basis, and I assume it goes for almost all D7100 users out there.

    • Matthew Fleisher

      Is it bad that I’ve never noticed any of these problems? I guess I’ve just never used any of those features.

  • Jon

    D7100 has less than half the performance of D600 for low-light ISO… per DxO mark. Is it that bad?

    D7100 = rated 1256 ISO

    D600 = rated 2980 ISO

    • Nikon AM I

      Understand that the DxOMark ratings indicate that a 25% difference is equal to 1/3rd stop, which means the D600 has around a 1 1/3 stop advantage in low light – more or less. This is to be expected as the D600 is full frame.

      However, by simply upgrading lenses you can often obtain a 2 to 4 stop improvement in low light – which is much more cost effective than upgrading the camera. So unless you already have the best lenses you can buy, concentrate on upgrading those first.

      • AM

        In the long term, it is wiser to upgrade to better lenses rather than upgrading bodies. But, for somebody on a budget, that’s probably not an option. Lenses with larger max apertures normally run for 3 times the cost of the lens with equivalent focal length but two stops slower.

        • BroncoBro

          You do get a break on lens costs with DX, however, your choices are limited a bit. Where you really make out is when you take advantage of some of the really nice primes that were made for 35mm film. I use a 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8 on a D300s. They all perform extremely well and the most expensive one was $400 on ebay. The 85 is just lights out as far as resolution, acutance and contrast.

          • AM

            Which proves my point. All those lenses run for about $1K. For less money you can get the kit lens in the same focal length (24-85mm VR); it was even free at some point. It’s not as sharp and fast like the primes, but for so many situations it gets the job done.
            However, if you want to step up to f/1.4 lenses, you will have to be ready to shell out over $4K to get the 24mm, 50mm, and 85mm.

            • BroncoBro

              I paid about $750 for the three of them, but OK. But what you say has some truth…and a zoom IS handy.

            • RacoonRoger

              D7100 ($1200) + $750 of glass is the price of a D600, without any lenses. Not even that 24-85.

              Don’t worry Bronco, when it comes to shooting on a budget nothing beats DX, yet.

            • AM

              I paid less than $2K for my brand new D600 and my brand new 24-85mm back in December. Have you realized that the 3 primes you’re talking about are FX lenses? It makes more sense to use them on a FX body, especially the 24mm. It’s just weird to use that lens on a DX body.

            • LobsterHat

              Not really, if you ever plan on going to full frame at any point in your life (it keeps getting cheaper), the primes are a good investment. The primes are in rough factors of 1.5 from each other (24/28,35,50,85 – geometric sequence for math types) so for the most part you just step down a focal length “notch” to get the DX equivalent. I have heard a lot of complaints about there not being precise equivalents, (eg: 50mm DX is like 75mm FX, not 85mm), but that is just the trade off you have to make with the cheaper sensor format.

            • BroncoBro

              Good point and think about it. How different, really, is 75 from 85? A half a step forward or back? We (I do it, too) get awfully hung up on wanting this or that focal length.

            • BroncoBro

              It makes sense until you realize that the 50mm is just a 50 on the FX. On the DX it’s equiv. to 75mm. So, for $100 (what I paid for my 50mm f/1.8) I got a superb portrait lens. I use the central 2/3 of the available field, so corner sharpness and vignetting are much better than the same lens on FX. Same goes for the 85mm. It works out to roughly a 135mm on DX. The 135mm f/2 Nikon is over a grand, even used. The 24mm is equiv. to a 35mm on FX. What is so weird about any of this? Don’t you use 35, 75 and 135mm lenses?

            • BroncoBro

              That IS my point. Unless you plan on presenting your work at the pixel level, most of what you get with FX is lost in the publishing process. You can get plenty of DR with DX if you’re careful After a while that becomes second nature. BTW, I tried a friend’s new D7100 and it’s pretty impressive. But still not as stout and high performance as the D300s. I’d love it if Nikon would give us a better sensor (i.e., better high ISO performance, not necessarily resolution) and a little better video performance and call it a D400. Really, the D300s doesn’t need much to bring it up a notch. Most of the camera is still pro quality and more than competitive. As for the D600, the same friend has that camera, too, and it’s fine. But not so much that I’d buy one. And of course, there’s the lens cost issues…

    • Lee

      The DxOMark “Scores” are completely 100% useless. I’m convinced they make them up at random. Never ever pay any attention to them. The charts, though, are great. Check out the SNR chart to get actual information about low-light performance.

      • Aldo

        they are not useless… you just have to be aware that they aren’t definitive.

      • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

        No, it’s true. I don’t see more than a 1/3rd stop difference between nominally processed raws shot on the D7100 and D600.

        I’ll publish a blog on it soon, but I did test it. DX0 numbers be damned–it’s the images that matter.

        • Calibrator

          That’s why testers usually consider two values: One that can be measured (by whatever method) – a lab value if you will – and, secondly, the subjective impression it leaves on the viewer. Some viewers may actually favour a product that has worse lab values.

          For example, in the images you provided I can see dramatic differences in some of the dark fabrics. The 7100 nearly completely loses structure in some of them, which I consider bad.

          It admittedly doesn’t alter the *whole* scene but to some people the integrity of a scene may depend on the more questionable areas like these problematic fabrics. To them the images are worlds apart…

      • umeshrw

        You may be right but in this case sadly right as the 7100 is just slightly better than 7000. And quite substantially lags behind 600.

        • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

          Does this look like quite substantially? These are nominally processed (to my taste) from files from Imaging-Resource.com :

          http://h.micahmedia.com/D7100hSLI06400NR0.jpg
          http://h.micahmedia.com/D600hSLI06400NR0.jpg

          I think that yes, there is a discernible difference, but I don’t think that it’s a big deal, even at larger print sizes. Factor in the D7100′s superior AF (not just more points, it’s also more consistent and better in low light) and I much prefer the D7100.

          Again, I’m going to publish my own comparison shots in the coming week, so it’s possible my opinion will change. But so far, I doubt it.

          EDIT: note that both of these actually look slightly less noisy before saving at jpeg quality 8.

          • Calibrator

            If you do your own tests please do a high-ISO comparison in low light.

            I don’t think those “box o’ stuff” test images are the best way to show the sensor differences. True – they show noise but in my experience there’s a difference between noise in a well-lit scene and in a scene that is mostly or completely dark.

          • Aldo

            nice soft box set up

          • Spy Black

            At high ISO’s like this there is no comparison, the D600 is clearly superior. At base ISO however the difference is not so vast. It was a hard decision for me between these two before I finally went with the D600.

          • umeshrw

            I am comparing only noise performance which degrades quickly as iso levels increases. At lower ISOs both look almost same. As for AF and other things are concerned, I agree with you . 7100 is better.

    • nameless

      Err… I think so. Same MP for half area… it’s logical to has half performance.

    • Max Weber

      Nikon D7100 is the latest and improved version of Nikon camera. Though it has lower ISO than D600, it doesn’t make much differenece. D7100 is still much better and has more features than earlier versions. I suggest to go for the D7100 if someone is on a fence.

      I have found a great review for Nikon D7100 for those who are interested in buying a great camera: http://www.squidoo.com/nikon-d7100-price-review-and-special-features

  • Assaad

    Great! Thanks!

  • Sahaja

    Thom Hogan (June 21, 2013): “To be clear: I expect one or both of the D400/D4x announcements in August”

    Admin – no good rumors about either of these cameras yet?

    • Spy Black

      The announcement is coming in a few moments – hold your breath…

    • Aldo

      Admin said he would post as soon as he learns something.

    • Matthew Fleisher

      Let me Google that and I’ll be right back…keep holding your breath.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      I reported on the Nikon D4x back in February: http://nikonrumors.com/2013/02/04/more-nikon-d4x-rumors.aspx/

      Nothing on the D400.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      You have to understand that I have not received a single tip on the D400. As far as I am concerned, it does not exists. If the announcement is in August, we should have some serious leaks by now and we don’t. Of course this could change any time.

    • FDF

      I got tired of waiting for D400 to replace my old D90 and went fullframe instead with D600 when it came out. Best purchase I ever made.

    • RacoonRoger

      The fact that they haven’t launched pro glass for DX in like, forever, isn’t a good enough indication that Nikon doesn’t want their pros to shoot DX?

      If they thought pros still shot DX, they would have updated that 17-55 f2.8 with VR ages ago.

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

        Not only pro DX, they have not announced any DX lenses lately.

    • Matthew Fleisher

      Hey, have you seen the new D4s?

  • Aldo

    Gratz to the d7100 users.

  • Tester

    Man, this thing is bug free

  • Cachimbon

    I got a fuji X system and never looked back. that’s how I solved it.

    • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

      Never looking back = trolling NR?

      • Cachimbon

        Actually I came back to get a link. Fuji just released a firmware with another one in a month that gives users not bug fixes but features requested and enhancements. Something Nikon NEVER gave us. So i was grabbing the link to make my point. Didn’t know I’d hurt your feelings in the process though but that was an added bonus!

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

          I have to agree on the firmware update – Fuji just added focus peaking to the X-Pro1, a camera that is now almost 2 years old and is about to be replaced. Nikon usually does only bug fixes in their firmware updates. New features are added in newer models in order to boost sales. Of course Fuji is a new player in the “serious” digital camera market and must make a good impression.

          • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

            It’s also something Canon has been doing lately e.g. With the 7D. Nikon could learn a thing or two from its rivals and Apple — making customers happy includes the period after you sell the product. Focus peaking might actually wean me from optical viewfinders.

            • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

              Yes, I think Sony did it too with focus peaking in their NEX cameras.

            • Spy Black

              Since when has Apple ever given a shìt about keeping customers happy after they bought something?

            • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

              Since forever. Obviously you’re not an Apple fan, but go talk to someone who uses Apple stuff about how Apple treats existing customers. iOS users, for example, are all going to get iOS7 for free quite soon. Final Cut Pro X users have gotten three major feature releases for free. Many Apple customers will wax lyrical about how Apple’s Genius bar fixed or replaced a broken product for free, even when they had damaged the device themselves. (It’s happened to me on two occasions.)

            • Spy Black

              “…go talk to someone who uses Apple stuff about how Apple treats existing customers.”
              I’m in the graphic arts industry and I’ve had to deal with Apple products since 1989, and I have a really solid understanding about how Apple treats it’s customers.

            • Calibrator

              In fact it’s the other way round:

              They do their utmost to make their customers very *unhappy* – to sell them the next iteration of their stuff.
              After the purchase the loyal follower is happy again – for a time.

              In the defense of Apple: That’s marketing 101 and most companies act this way – or at least try to (be as successful as Apple ;-)).

          • Maji

            Nikon did that with their N-1 series and FT-1 adapters… they added AF-C capabilities by firmware update. So, to say that Nikon does not add enhancements to their systems is not entirely true.

          • Calibrator

            “Of course Fuji is a new player in the “serious” digital camera market and must make a good impression.”

            If one applies this logic to Nikon’s behaviour then it doesn’t paint a pretty picture…

        • umeshrw

          Didn’t know I’d hurt your feelings in the process though but that was an added bonus!
          Converted fanatics are more loyal than regular ones.

        • Calibrator

          “Didn’t know I’d hurt your feelings in the process though but that was an added bonus!”

          Turns out that you are even worse than I thought…

    • Calibrator

      If you post here then you do “look back”…

  • Eta76

    Wow, it seems like the EXIF bug is solved. Even though I got bashed by NIKON Nederland, by just asking to correct this, or even show me one application that could prove the EXIF information was already correct..

    • N8008S

      It’s all about you.

  • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

    It was a good launch by Nikon this time with little general show stoppers, wished Nikon launched the D400 as fast 16mp camera before or year after D7000 – they would made killing of a camera like this.

    Hope the D400 comes soon, however it will have to be a bit of camera to satisfy the price over the D7100 – an excellent camera…

    • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

      It would be smart for them to make the D400 16mp/8fps. They could go to market with this today. I don’t expect they’ll do that though. I don’t think they’re interested in developing the 16mp sensor any further, and the 24mp/DX sensor currently outperforms the 16mp one. Quite happy with the D7100 IQ.

      • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

        True on that analysis – just wished they did the D400 a few years ago would sell boat loads and kept the Pro DX users happy as larry.

        • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

          I don’t know if you’ve tried/purchased a D7100, but the sensor is quite promising. If you’re curious take a look at http://blog.micahmedia.com/2013/07/02/adventures-in-measurebation/

          Click the images for full size (WP seems to downsize them).

          • Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

            Yes I’ve got the D7100 quite an excellent camera and the D400 will have to pack some good features to charge the premium that Nikon will charge for it (probably £1700+) and to pull the punters in

  • http://micahmedia.com/ Micah

    Excellent! I had noticed the bottom two shutter speeds in 1080/24 seemed non-linear. Confirmed that this fixes it!

    Thanks for the heads up Admin!

  • Dext

    great are we following Canon’s lead to the bottom with bugfixes on firmware? We used to have cameras that didn’t need a bugfix for 3 years, only new lens support. Unlike Canon’s bugfix per month run with the 5D2. Now the D7100 is how many months old?

    • Calibrator

      We will likely see so-called “day one patches” in the future, like with video games or other computer software: Patches that get released on the product launch date to actually make it usable…

      And lots of users will accept this as the industry has trained them to accept the “fact that software is so incredibly complicated that programming mistakes are unavoidable!”.

      Which of course is untrue. All “bugs” can be eliminated but it costs time – for testing the software and then fixing the software. Time the industry loses for selling the products…

  • Parth

    So is the stuckup aperture and ISO in the live view mode during video recording resolved?

  • BigEater

    I just know they intended to say they added focus peaking but I can’t see that in the list. Maybe they forgot.

  • DK

    Is it possible to shoot 1hour continuous video with D7100? Is there any hack available?

    • Yuri Bezmenoz

      Interested in this as well.

  • Matthew Fleisher

    Does anyone know where I can get a copy of C 1.00?

  • Back to top